People v. Alicia

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Alicia

144 A.D.2d 475, 534 N.Y.S.2d 883, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11800

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedNovember 14, 1988

StatusPublished

This text of 144 A.D.2d 475 (People v. Alicia) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Alicia, 144 A.D.2d 475, 534 N.Y.S.2d 883, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11800 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Feldman, J.), rendered April 27, 1983, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence adduced at trial in the light most favorable to the prosecution (People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to support the conviction. Furthermore, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (CPL 470.15 [5]).

The defendant’s sentence was not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80). Thompson, J. P., Bracken, Brown and Sullivan, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Feldman, J.), rendered April 27, 1983, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence adduced at trial in the light most favorable to the prosecution (People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to support the conviction. Furthermore, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (CPL 470.15 [5]).

The defendant’s sentence was not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80). Thompson, J. P., Bracken, Brown and Sullivan, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

144 A.D.2d 475, 534 N.Y.S.2d 883, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11800, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-alicia-nyappdiv-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack